In that OPERATOR ipl console log you closed, find the line that reads "hh:mm:ss GRAF xxxx LOGON AS OPERATOR USERS = 1" xxxx is the console that VM IPL-ed on. Is xxxx SYSC? SYSG? a console in some other room?
-------------------------------------------------------- This e-mail, including any attachments, may be confidential, privileged or otherwise legally protected. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this e-mail in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, do not disseminate, copy or otherwise use this e-mail or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail from your system. -----Original Message----- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Berry van Sleeuwen Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 2:26 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: IPL without OPERATOR on console Hello List, Last week we have seen an IPL that did not go the way I'd expected. It went OK, so VM is running, but it doesn't feel right. In the past our IPL procedures were: - Connect a terminal session to a console (let's say device 820) - load the LPAR on HMC with loadparm 820. - On the console the SA-IPL appears. - Change parameters if required and press PF10. - On the console user OPERATOR is logged on and some information on IPL is displayed on the console. - User OPERATOR runs PROP and disconnects. Our new VM runs on a z9 machine. (actually 6 VM's on two machines) The IPL now looks like this: - Connect terminal - load LPAR - console turns to the VM logon screen. No SA-IPL, so also no way to specify a PROMPT or a different PARM disk. No user OPERATOR to ask for start parameters (WARM, NOAUTOLOG) or to display the IPL steps, such as SPOOL init, and things like that. When closing the console log for operator I can see the lines I would expect to see on the console so it did all those things but it didn't show us that. It only happens on a z9 machine. Our VM's on z890 and z990 machines do show the SA-IPL during IPL. All VM's are z/VM 5.2 and use basically the same system config. So it looks like it has something to do with the machine or its configuration. Has anyone ever seen this? Any ideas as to what the cause would be? TIA, Berry van Sleeuwen.
